From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/726 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl 0.8.8 released Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:48:37 +0200 Message-ID: <20120419074836.GJ16237@port70.net> References: <20120418090756.GW7281@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120418191328.5ea16f57@newbook> <20120418222157.0f4e43ba@newbook> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1334821735 28185 80.91.229.3 (19 Apr 2012 07:48:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 07:48:55 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-727-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Apr 19 09:48:51 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SKm6k-00058t-Ch for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:48:50 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 31836 invoked by uid 550); 19 Apr 2012 07:48:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 31828 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2012 07:48:49 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120418222157.0f4e43ba@newbook> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:726 Archived-At: * Isaac Dunham [2012-04-18 22:21:57 -0700]: > Isaac Dunham wrote: > > > On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 05:07:56 -0400 > > Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > With this release, musl seems to have complete interface-level > > > coverage of ISO C99 and POSIX 2008. There are still some features > > > I forget what they were, but ISTR seeing one or two missing functions > > in one of the headers I worked on. > Ignore the above claim--looking back over the headers, I guess I was > wrong. > btw there are approximate api coverage tables (generated using ctags and nm vs posix functions and c99 annex b) http://repo.or.cz/w/musl-tools.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/tab_posix.html http://repo.or.cz/w/musl-tools.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/c99.html c99 is really completely covered (wchar_t is misreported, imaginary is compiler issue, fma macros are arch dependent)